Another ATA 5 year old black belt

[puunui]

The school I purchased follows KKW guidelines. They don't compete at all in AAU or USAT tournaments. The belts are there to represent progression in the curriculum and in taekwondo in general.

Do you plan at some point to have your students compete at aau or usat tournaments? if there were a kukkiwon poomsae seminar or usat sparring clinic given in your area, would you consider attending?

 

[mastercole]

It takes about one year to earn a Hapkido 1st dan in Korea, same as a taekwondo 1st poom/dan. Personally, I don't really see what the big deal is over a 1st dan or 1st poom.

I agree. To me 1st Dan/Poom is important because it is hopefully the beginning of deep learning. After that, maybe 4th Dan because that dan opens the doors to more learning, like instructors course, referee courses, coach courses, etc. and the 4th Dan can apply for dan for their students. After that, they don't seem as important.

 

[andyjeffries]

Being around until 4th Dan, you naturally will see teaching perspectives. I do believe that 3rd Dan should assist in teaching responsibilities, such that when they go out on their own, at 4th Dan, they have that experience. It is during the 3rd dan period that the assistant instructor starts thinking about how they will keep this, or change that, or get rid of this in favor of that, etc. Then at 4th Dan, they get to test their own theories out on their own students. When students open their own dojang, I as a general rule give them complete freedom to do and teach however they want. They can always come and ask, but they don't I generally keep my mouth shut and let them figure it out for themselves. Again, I am not into micromanaging or controlling my students. As 4th Dan, they can and should exercise their own freedom and judgment on how to do things. Similarly, when you start your own family, your parents leave you alone and you raise your kids as you see fit. Same thing. Ultimately, the martial arts, and life is about freedom, making choices, learning from those choices, and living with the consequences of those choices.

That's a good point, no one gave me lessons on how to be a father, I just suddenly had kids and had to deal with it.

Interestingly I have a theory that people try to fix the problems in parenting that they perceived they received growing up. For example, I was bullied as a child and always felt molly-coddled by my mother. She was doing the best she could (I see that now) but I've always tried to make sure that I'm more "get up, don't be silly" with my kids if the fall over rather than lots of kisses/hugs/etc and I make sure I get time to play fight with both of them (just so they get used to physical contact). My older brother had a different impression of his upbringing and we've discussed that he's doing a similar counter-reacting.

I wonder if it's the same with new school owners?

I know I'm doing things differently to the way my Master does things (but very similar to the way my Grandmaster, original instructor did them).

 

[Tez3]

That's a good point, no one gave me lessons on how to be a father, I just suddenly had kids and had to deal with it.

Interestingly I have a theory that people try to fix the problems in parenting that they perceived they received growing up. For example, I was bullied as a child and always felt molly-coddled by my mother. She was doing the best she could (I see that now) but I've always tried to make sure that I'm more "get up, don't be silly" with my kids if the fall over rather than lots of kisses/hugs/etc and I make sure I get time to play fight with both of them (just so they get used to physical contact). My older brother had a different impression of his upbringing and we've discussed that he's doing a similar counter-reacting.

I wonder if it's the same with new school owners?

I know I'm doing things differently to the way my Master does things (but very similar to the way my Grandmaster, original instructor did them).

You do know where children come from though?

 

[SPX]

Aikido has strict practice requirements before a student can become eligible to test for a higher rank. These are the US Aikido Federation guidelines - the USAF is affiliated with the Aikikai Hombu in Japan, and I imagine the requirements are the same there, as it is the world HQ that issues ranks ultimately based on the recommendation of approved instructors.

6th kyu 20 days of practice
5th Kyu 40 days of practice
4th Kyu 80 days of practice after obtaining 5th Kyu
3rd Kyu 100 days of practice after obtaining 4th Kyu
2nd Kyu 200 days of practice after obtaining 3rd Kyu
1st Kyu 300 days of practice after obtaining 2nd Kyu
1st Dan 300 days of practice after obtaining 1st Kyu

Assigning "days" seems arbitrary to me. It should be about hours, not days. I mean, someone who does "20 days of practice," training one hour a day, has no where near the experience of someone who does 20 days of practice, with 4 hours a day.

Or consider the case of the TKD kickboxer Jerry Trimble. From what I understand, he received his black belt in one year, by training 6 days a week, 6 hours a day. Someone else who started training in TKD the same day that Trimble did would have also been training for one year, even though this second guy was only doing two classes a week and not practicing at all on his own.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I wouldn't. I respect and honor ALL of the knowledge the people that created taekwondo had as it played a role no matter how small, no matter if it is not taught in the main now. It is their complete personal experiences that made them who they are in the first place.

I also respect and honor all of the knowledge of the people that created taekwondo. I simply would hesitate to call what was done early on 'old school' because I do not feel that it is an accurate description and do not distinguish the two by olds school/new school, but rather by kwan era and unification era.

 

[dancingalone]

Assigning "days" seems arbitrary to me. It should be about hours, not days. I mean, someone who does "20 days of practice," training one hour a day, has no where near the experience of someone who does 20 days of practice, with 4 hours a day.

Yeah, probably. Perhaps as aikido dojo modernize and we all add record-keeping software, the requirements will evolve to tracking hours of floor time.

 

[dancingalone]

I also respect and honor all of the knowledge of the people that created taekwondo. I simply would hesitate to call what was done early on 'old school' because I do not feel that it is an accurate description and do not distinguish the two by olds school/new school, but rather by kwan era and unification era.

Are we perhaps splitting hairs? I think calling it old school TKD is reasonable enough. If you prefer kwan-era tkd, that's fine by me too and I will endeavor to remember to use it in the future. Whatever gets the point across...

 

[dancingalone]

Do you plan at some point to have your students compete at aau or usat tournaments? if there were a kukkiwon poomsae seminar or usat sparring clinic given in your area, would you consider attending?

I do not plan to field a tournament team at this time. It's not my area of expertise and I have other projects to tend to. I would have no objections to my students doing so but I would need to refer them to other resources for instruction.

As far as attending KKW seminars or learning opportunities, I am not against the idea. I would seriously consider attending a FIC should my schedule permit it.

 

[puunui]

That's a good point, no one gave me lessons on how to be a father, I just suddenly had kids and had to deal with it. Interestingly I have a theory that people try to fix the problems in parenting that they perceived they received growing up.

Of course everyone does that to a certain degree. People remember the negative aspects and try to not perpetuate the cycle so to speak, only to realize perhaps later why their parents or teachers they did what they did. The openly critical phase tends to happen at two specific periods on the journey, at 1st Dan, when students feel they have "arrived", and at late 3rd, newly minted 4th Dan, when they venture on their own and are perhaps the most critical of their instructor and their methods or most needing to make a break from their teachers and become their own person, so to speak. I can almost always tell what level someone is when they are out there voicing brashly how their teachers or seniors are "wrong". Invariably, it is either 1st Dans or 4th Dans, at least in taekwondo. Some never grow out of these phases, which is unfortunate.

By the way, on the issue of constant and never ending learning or improvement, I personally do not think that the learning ever ends, that there are always lessons to be learned. One of the things that this new change in leadership at USAT will bring is more opportunities for seniors to continue their learning, into the philosophical or policy making areas of the journey. The seniors, like those 1st or 4th Dans, also have their own ideas on how to improve things at a national or international level, and they finally get the chance to give their ideas a try.

 

[dancingalone]

G
Myself, I don't know if I would call their standards high, I think I would call them strict. To me, a high standard would be a correctness of technique, compared to a standard, and back then, especially in the USA, most everyone, Korean and non-Korean lacked correctness of standard. In earlier cases, the standard was still being set, so it was whatever goes. Being strict was adhering to "whatever goes" at the time.

It has been years but what I recalled of their technique would not look out of place in any dojo/dojang I have trained in. Crisp basics, visible speed and power.

 

[mastercole]

Out of interest, do the senior masters/grandmasters on here specifically put effort in to teaching their Dan level students how to teach? At what grade does this take place and in what form? Or do you just give them a nudge when they get to 4th Dan with no real teaching experience in to running their own club?

My most senior student happens to be a South Korean citizen. He is now 7th Dan, not that Dan matters at all, but he owns his own dojang now for more than 10 years. Before he started training with me, he trained with his father in Shipalki. His family says they are cousins of GM CHUN Sang Sup, founder of Jidokwan. During training he would naturally help out students in class. I noticed that he had excellent teaching skills in addition to excellent martial arts skills. So it was natural, I opened a dojang in a near by town and literally gave him the school once it was up and running for about a year. He teaches at that same school today and it is his full time occupation.

I don't really have a set curriculum for training instructors. That said, I have been involved in instructor training for over a decade. I bring in elite level practitioners (Taekwondo & Taekkyon) to my school and invited other instructors from around the USA to come train and learn from them. I took 10 Americans to the 1st Kukkiwon Foreign Instructor's Course in Korea. I have sent instructors from my school, and other schools, off to other locations to learn, even to other nations. I'm probably more focused on helping instructors from other schools develop more than I am bring up instructors from my own school, who all tend to have other careers they do not intend on leaving.

 

[andyjeffries]

You do know where children come from though?

Yes, but that's a visual I'm trying desperately to forget!! ;-)

 

[andyjeffries]

Assigning "days" seems arbitrary to me. It should be about hours, not days. I mean, someone who does "20 days of practice," training one hour a day, has no where near the experience of someone who does 20 days of practice, with 4 hours a day.

To paraphrase an expression I know someone on here uses - have they had 20 days of practice or 1 day of practice repeated 20 times. Even two people in different dojo doing 20 days will have completely different experiences depending on their own attitude/ability, the quality of their training partners, the quality of their instructor. This is my issue with assigning arbitrary times like this.

 

[puunui]

I wouldn't. I respect and honor ALL of the knowledge the people that created taekwondo had as it played a role no matter how small, no matter if it is not taught in the main now. It is their complete personal experiences that made them who they are in the first place.

Thinking about it, I do believe that judo did play a part in taekwondo's development, the idea or philosophy of actual contact and sparring being a primary method for developing techniques. The strongest school for sparring competition in the beginning, the Jidokwan, had the strongest judo roots.

 

[Tez3]

Yes, but that's a visual I'm trying desperately to forget!! ;-)

Er I did mean the begetting of them as opposed to the hatching bit lol, you won't be watching 'Fetch the Midwife' on Sundays them!


Interestingly, that programme is set in the 1950's when childhood was shorter than it is now, when even 5 years olds had responsibilities that people would consider almost child abuse now.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

No, it's not.

While I am certainly open to changing my perspective, nothing that you present in this post is particularly compelling.

Although competing is encouraged, many ATA students don't attend tournaments at all.

And if they ever decide to, they will have a rank and be bracketed accordingly. Convenient.

Like with most martial arts schools today, TKD or not, ATA or not, the belt rank is used to designate knowledge of curriculum and there is a certain connotation of proficiency attached as well.

Sure, they're used for that too. I said primary use, not only use.

I really wonder how that idea is so proliferate in your perspective.

And I really wonder how that idea is so absent from your perspective.

The school I purchased follows KKW guidelines. They don't compete at all in AAU or USAT tournaments. The belts are there to represent progression in the curriculum and in taekwondo in general.

Your choice as a school owner is fine and I have no criticism of it whatsoever.

But you are using it as support for your argument. While I am very happy for you in your purchase of the school (I hope it does well!!), I do not feel that it strengthens your arguement.

As I said, I am open to changing my perspective, but nothing that you have said thus far has been particularly compelling.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Are we perhaps splitting hairs? I think calling it old school TKD is reasonable enough. If you prefer kwan-era tkd, that's fine by me too and I will endeavor to remember to use it in the future. Whatever gets the point across...

Not splitting hairs; I just wasn't sure if you were thinking that I wasn't classifying kwan era/old school TKD as TKD. Sometimes I am not sure how well I am coming across and I simply wanted to avoid misunderstanding.

I don't have any criticism of you calling it old school; I simply don't call it that.

 

[dancingalone]

While I am certainly open to changing my perspective, nothing that you present in this post is particularly compelling.

Is it because you have ignored a few of the points I have made? It might be useful to restate what you said in my own words so we can verify the source of our argument.

You have noted repeatedly the origins of the dan system in judo as a means of placing competitors into similar levels of ability for sporting purposes. You apply this extremely broadly, going so far as to state that you would "remind you that martial training has nothing to do with belts. Belts are for sports."

Yet this even upon a cursory review can't stand.

• I have noted on several occasions in this thread and elsewhere that there are plenty of examples of martial arts that have adopted a dan rank system, yet their implementation of dans have NOTHING to do with competition. Mainline aikido is a great example of this where there is simply no concept of tournament competition. You can also look to a few lines of Chinese systems (the local Hung Gar teacher in my area for example) that likewise have added belts to conform to the public expectation of them, but not as a competitive vehicle for his students.
• You emphatically claim that competition is the primary reason for belts. In so doing, you've left behind arguably the majority of the taekwondoin out there who don't compete, much less the even larger numbers of martial artists in other disciplines who likewise may not compete. I submit that the belt system means something else to them as taught to them by their own teachers and it's likely has nothing to do with tournaments or competition at all.
• You then specifically make the same claim to ATA taekwondo belts. Even though I believe you said elsewhere that you have no actual experience with Songahm taekwondo. Even though I've alluded to the fact that there is a certain mythos attached to belt colors and ranks in the ATA along with a connotation of skills proficiency. I even mentioned the rank of brown belt defined in the ATA is where 'the tree has taken root' and that it is a symbol that the student has 'mastered the basics'.
• Meanwhile a handful of taekwondo experts here on MT have said previously that competition sparring is only one part of TKD, that the full range of TKD encompasses much, much more. Given that sentiment, are we to truly believe that the belt ranking system, one of the key parts to defining junior/senior relationships, is PRIMARILY meant for sports bracketing? Really?

And if they ever decide to, they will have a rank and be bracketed accordingly. Convenient.

And if they never compete, their belt will still have the meanings attached to them taught to them by their teacher and their grandmaster. They don't need the added convenience of tournament bracketing to validate their existence.

Sure, they're used for that too. I said primary use, not only use.

Primary use is very, very debatable.

And I really wonder how that idea is so absent from your perspective.

Probably because the idea is very foreign to the martial arts I practice. I've already discussed aikido. Likewise with my brand of Goju-ryu karate which is anything but sport-focused. Even the TKD black belts I hold had nothing to do with tournament placement at all, although certainly when I attended open tournaments, that came into play. My TKD black belt at the dojang I earned it in meant I was a guy with some skills and also some toughness to back it up with.

So you see, Daniel, I do have to object when a statement is made that the primary reason for belts in the first place is for bracketing. Not in my experience. Not in a lot of other people's experience either.

Your choice as a school owner is fine and I have no criticism of it whatsoever.

But you are using it as support for your argument. While I am very happy for you in your purchase of the school (I hope it does well!!), I do not feel that it strengthens your arguement.

As I said, I am open to changing my perspective, but nothing that you have said thus far has been particularly compelling.

Thank you for the well wishes.

I think it strengthens my argument a great deal. It is a KKW curriculum school that awards colored belts and dan ranks. Since the school has not and does not compete in tournaments, I must conclude that the usage of belts is similarly to track student progress and to serve as a reward/merit badge as it can with other styles. Oh, and to establish who is junior, who is senior, too.

Let's put the compelling test upon your shoulders since you assert your premise is true for everyone and every system that has a dan ladder. How do you answer?

 

[ralphmcpherson]

Given that taekwondo has been codified in pretty much its current form for over forty five years and the founders transitioned from whatever they were doing before to create taekwondo, I would have a hard time calling the early stuff 'old school taekwondo.' Given that the Kukkiwon does not limit what one teaches to just their curriculum, a modern school could still teach precisely what you describe above with regards to the grappling from judo and maybe some karate forms in addition to the core curriculum and it would be perfectly acceptable.


Well, after first dan in the Kukkiwon, you learn a few new Korean forms, but when I had trained I learned the vast majority of the technical material in the geub grades. I continued training and learned Koryo and then was taught keum gang, and ultimately received dojo-dans for my second and third dans, but was never KKW certified and really only consider myself to be an ildan.

Even though my former GM tasked me with teaching taekwondo, I consider myself unqualified to do so. Part of the reason that I left was because I was not receiving training anymore; I would show up to train and was handed the class. The trend seemed to be the same for other students who stayed on much past first dan. By the time I left, he had twelve year old first and second pums teaching adult classes. Nice kids, and very good practitioners. But not ready to teach in my opinion.

Daniel, when you say - "Given that taekwondo has been codified in pretty much its current form for over forty five years", what do you see as it's current form? I only ask because if there's one thing Ive started to realise about tkd over the last few years, its that tkd is just such a vague term. I mean, what the kukkiwon does compared to what itf does compared to how my club trains just seems very varied, and the more 'club demos' Im seeing around the place just drives this home further. Im not objecting to your statement, Im just curious as to what you see tkd's current form to be. Or are you speaking soley about kukkiwon tkd?